Corporate
earnings during this same time, however, have seen huge profits and
consistent gains. Those global-minded companies in particular (e.g.,
corporate board members who belong to the Trilateral Commission) have
profited even more.

According
to the BEA, aggregate corporate profits totaled $874 billion in 2002,
$1.02 trillion in 2003 and $1.2 trillion in 2004. Exxon increased
its annual earnings from $21.5 billion in 2003 to $25.33 billion in
2004. This was not uncommon. From 1976 through 2004, corporate profits
from U.S. companies totalled over $14 trillion. Foreign companies
got a big share also.

Is
it possible that the U.S. can be stripped to the bone while multinational
corporations get rich? Was it planned this way from the beginning
(circa 1973)? Yes, and yes.

There
is another aspect of national bankruptcy that needs to be mentioned,
namely, the landslide loss of technological genius that made America
great in the first place. Putting aside the legal and illegal transfers
of technology to China during the Clinton administration, consider
the case of IBM:

Lenovo,
China's largest PC company, has completed a $1.25 billion acquisition
of IBM's Personal Computing Division (PCD). Lenovo, which already
has a third of the Chinese PC market and shares in enterprise PC
markets around the world, says this deal makes it a new international
IT competitor and the world's third-largest personal computing company.
The PCD acquisition, first announced in December, means, according
to newly named Lenovo CEO Stephen Ward, that the company will have
combined annual PC revenue of about $13 billion and volume of about
14 million units. Ward says Lenovo expects immediate synergies through
complementary customer bases, product offerings and geographic coverage,
among other things. (SA Computer Magazine, 5-3-2005)

That
is, the very company that invented the PC and literally revolutionized
the world has now sold 100% of their Personal Computing Division to
a Communist nation who have sworn many times that they will bury us.
Chinese engineers have now moved into IBM's Armonk, NY headquarters
to take over.

Another
example is that Steven Chen, a Taiwanese-born American citizen and
one of America's most brilliant and top supercomputer designers, quit
his post with Silicon Graphics and is moving to mainland China. He
is choosing to build his next generation supercomputer in China.

According
to IDC, the premier intelligence resource and forecaster in the computer
world,

Attracting
a leading supercomputer designer like Chen is good news for the
growing Chinese computer industry. China has recently been primarily
focusing its high-performance technical computer designs on commodity
component clusters. In general, clusters provide very attractive
price-performance but lack some of the high-end capabilities provided
by traditional supercomputers. Chen plans to bridge the gap by building
high-performance blade-based clusters in China and offering them
for sale around the world.

If
America's technology prowess is a national treasure, then people like
Steven Chen are national treasures also. How is it that we cannot
offer enough enticement to keep such a talent in the United States?
In an age where sports figures can command million of dollars per
season for pure entertainment, this seems rather odd. It's not just
that Chen isn't helping the U.S. but that he is helping a Communist
government develop technology that can be used against us -- commercially
and militarily.

Example
of a "Blind Eye"

The
New York Times carried an article on May 17, 2005, "Bush's Choice:
Anger China or Congress Over Currency." China bought more than $200
billion in Treasuries in 2004, bringing their total ownership of U.S.
debt to a whopping $650 billion. These purchases essentially finance
a comparable trade deficit with China. Because China's currency, the
yuan, is pegged to the U.S. dollar, China is in a position to manipulate
the system (undervaluing its currency) and gain a whopping trade advantage
over America.

U.S.
Businesses have filed volumes of complaints with the U.S. Trade Representative,
Rob Portman, about issues ranging from China's dumping of products
at prices below cost of manufacturing, to widespread copyright and
patent violations. Congress is somewhat sensitive to this issue and,
bucking the president, is pushing for tariffs and quotas against China
to punish them for milking the system.

Bush
could choose to be critical of China (and infuriate China) or give
China a clean bill of health and say that everything is fine (and
infuriate Congress and the American people).

So,
what do you do when you've invited an 800 pound gorilla into your
living room? You pray he doesn't get mad when you ask him to leave.

Treasury
Secretary John Snow was on the spot. In the past, he refused to criticize
China openly, but rather sought to rely on "financial diplomacy" instead.
He believed that China could be persuaded that flexible exchange rates
were in its own best interest. On May 16, 2005, Snow was interviewed
on CNBC:

"I'm
convinced they will move... We've said that they have made such
strides in improving their financial infrastructure, that they should
move to it now and, are calling on them to do so ... Now is the
time. We're anxious to see them move. It's time."

Later
in the year, according to the October 11, 2005 PR Newswire's "Quote
of the Day", Snow stated:

"We
are anxious to see the Chinese fulfill the commitment they made
to allow market forces to play a larger role in setting their currency's
value over time. They've gotten on the path that allows them to
do so and we'd like to see China continue on that path."

Since
when would China ever forego an opportunity to plunder the U.S. because
Snow, et. al, are "anxious" to see them refrain from doing so?

It
is easier to understand the conflict of interest if you look back
a few years at John Snow's career. From 1994-1996, Snow was chairman
of the Business Roundtable, an association of 250 chief executive
officers of the largest corporations, representing over $3.7 trillion
in combined revenues. During that time, he was a key player in supporting
the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

He
recently received the Marco Polo Award (2001), awarded by the U.S.-China
Foundation for International Exchanges as the highest honor that can
be given to a foreign business leader. He is a director of CarMax,
U.S. Steel, Johnson & Johnson, Verizon Communications, sits on the
boards of Johns Hopkins University, is chairman of the Kennedy Center
Corporate Fund Board, and is a member of the Business Council and
Business Roundtable.

In
short, Snow has been at the corporate center of promoting globalism
and in particular, building China's trade for many years. As Treasury
Secretary, he is in an influential position of trust to protect the
American people from economic harm. But, will he?

To
understand more completely, ask yourself this question. Who invested
money in, and built up, this 800 pound gorilla?

Take
Bechtel for instance, one of the largest construction and engineering
companies in the world. In 1994, Bechtel was the first U.S. company
to receive a construction license in China. It has completed 80 major
projects in China and has permanent offices located in Beijing, Shanghai,
Taipei and Hong Kong. Its latest project is a $4.3 billion petrochemical
complex in Daya Bay that will produce 2.3 million tons of products
annually. It's being touted as one of the largest Sino-foreign investments
to date, and is 50% owned by a subsidiary of Royal Dutch/Shell.

If
we say, "China is really profiting from the U.S.", to whom are we
really referring? It's true that the Chinese government is getting
an advantage from the increase in economic activity, but who are the
front-line collectors of revenue and aggregators of profit in China?
That's right, it's the same multinational corporations.

So,
as noted above, when John Snow reiterates his optimism that China
will change policy on its own, you can see just how selective his
vision is. As long as China's policy remains as it is, America gets
plundered and the global corporations in China rack up record profits.

This
article contends that America is for sale. The sale is "under the
table" in that the American people don't have a clue that it's being
slowly sold out from under their feet, one piece at a time. The sale
is deceptive because as the red ink grows larger and larger, we are
told by these same globalists that trade and budget deficits don't
really matter that much. The sale is dishonest because it was planned
from the beginning by elitist groups like the Trilateral Commission,
to twist and manipulate the system to their own pecuniary benefit.

The
fact that America's downward financial spiral started in earnest shortly
after the Trilateral Commission was founded by David Rockefeller and
Zbigniew Brzezinski, is not incidental. The very policies that brought
us the "New International Economic Order" (their own phrase) have
wrecked our country. They claimed that interdependence and globalization
were inevitable; but in fact these were contrived as a scheme to multiply
their own profits.

Conclusion

America
is in a very grievous and trepid situation. Any number of isolated
incidents could touch off a financial firestorm that burns our house
to the ground. When a company goes bankrupt, it is seldom advertised
in advance. Its customers, shareholders and debtors are invariably
in a state of shock when the bankruptcy occurs, even though hind site
shows that there were ample evidences of impending bankruptcy. So
it is with America: There is evidence everywhere of what is happening
to us, but there are few eyes to see it nor ears to hear it.

In
30-40 short years, America has gone from the strongest and most stable
nation in the world, to one of the weakest and unstable.

Humpty
Dumpty sat on a wall.
Humpty had a great fall.
All the king's horses,
And all the king's men,
Couldn't put Humpty together again.

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

Most
assume that it was Humpty's fault that he fell. If he was that fragile,
why would he sit on the dangerous and lofty wall? A little investigation
might have shown that Humpty didn't just fall, but that he was pushed
-- by the same people who later failed to put him back together again!

Patrick M. Wood
is editor of The August Review,
which builds on his original research with the late Dr. Antony C. Sutton,
who was formerly a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution for War, Peace
and Revolution at Stanford University. Their 1977-1982 newsletter, Trilateral
Observer, was the original authoritative critique on the New International
Economic Order spearheaded by members of the Trilateral Commission.

Their highly regarded
two-volume book, Trilaterals Over Washington, became a standard reference
on global elitism. Wood's ongoing work is to build a knowledge center
that provides a comprehensive and scholarly source of information on globalism
in all its related forms: political, economic and religious.